[dicey]

Pretty area and pics. I've wanted to do a trip to Lime Ridge ever since I saw it from BLHR. Way to go!

[DIYSteve]

Kim, our firm's land use expert, Sam, is too busy this morning for me to bother him, so I'll ask you. So it looks like an EA issued in March 2006 with a "no significant impact" finding. What's the status with the EIS? The link posted by Tom does not help me answer that question. I'm no land use expert, but I've seen EIS's processed in relatively short order, certainly less than 3-1/2 years after an EA!

[Dayhike Mike]

[Kim Brown]

The 2003 EA was done in March 2006; new damage occurred in Nov 2006, necessitating a whole new process. I can’t speak to the poor website design – but when faced with a confusing bit of information, just pick up the phone and call. The Forest Service people do talk to the public. Get beyond the receptionist (often knowledgeable, but as in any seasonal work, the reception desk can also be manned by summer students). Ask for the District Ranger, or the person in charge of the particular road you’re interested in. I’m no expert, but in discussions with the District Ranger and receiving updates from the District’s listserv, I understand that funding needs to be identified as well as NEPA requirements satisfied. I don’t know if NEPA is the largest time-hog; surely there are internal struggles and red-tape, as would be expected in any large organization. This is a big project, and they want to be sure the right decisions are made. Stalling and hassling the public is not in the Mission Statement of the Forest Service; preserving watersheds is the first point in their Mission Statement. That’s why the Dayhike Mike Plan won’t work, palatable as it sounds. There are lots of issues regarding the Suiattle road – whether or not to repair is one, identifying the various environmental issues (fisheries, wetlands, tree stands, Wild & Scenic River status, Wilderness Watch*) ordering the EA, having the EA done, design considerations. As in any managing agency, the FS likely has their roads guys who would love to just plow through as Dayhike Mike suggests and “get ‘er done,” but those diabolical environmentalists** both within the FS and externally keep them in constant check - and surely in an irritated state of mind. So from Nov 2006 to summer 2009, personally, I think progress has been done with lightning speed, considering all of the above, and of course there are other issues that I don’t know about. NEPA requirements mandated by the Federal government are on the Forests’ dime; an EA is by no means cheap. Pulling a figure out of my ass, I’d guess the Suiattle process for both flood events (Oct 2003 and Nov 2006) to be 6 figures beginning with the number 5, maybe even 7 figures by the time it’s over (I’m totally making this figure up, but have seen EA invoices from engineering firms on other projects [not FS, but state and county projects]). This is just stuff that I’ve noticed as a spectator. Like I said, I am by no means an expert, and none of this information is classified – any private citizen can follow the processes simply by doing what I’m doing – calling, reading, getting on listservs, going to meetings, and not bashing the agency responsible, but respecting it’s employees and their livelihoods as I would like to be respected. This NEPA stuff is often true for trails as well. For instance, the Whitechuck Bench trail did have a categorical exclusion for re-rerouting as a matter of course, however the damage is beyond the exclusion corridor, and a new EA needs to be done. *facetious dig ** term used by an enviro friend of mine to describe enviros

[Dayhike Mike]

For what it's worth, I'd be happy to give them an EA proclaiming a clean bill of health and giving the thumbs up to "git'er done" for six figures starting with a '1'. Probably even five figures if they asked nicely. What a bargain!

[Hulksmash]

Dayhike Mike wrote:

[Dayhike Mike]

[DIYSteve]

Kim, a few posts ago, you seemed to take the position that satisfying NEPA requirements was the sole hurdle and now you seem to say that the delays might be the result of one or more of several things, possibly including NEPA and funding. While I'm no land use expert, I've seen NEPA in action in the past 23 years, and I have seen projects go from conception thru NEPA to permitting and ground breaking in a few months. I have never seen NEPA kill a project that made sense to me. Maybe this will be the first -- but I'm not yet persuaded that the mere existence of NEPA is the proximate cause for the delays of this project. I have been hit with two political discussion strikes so I will forebear from responding to the general NEPA bashing, except to state . . . ah, never mind. I do recall that the Audubon Society strenuously objected to rebuilding the road past mile post X (it's been awhile and I don't recall the details). I made my beef with AS and eventually let my membership lapse. AS is a good group with good aims, but they got it wrong on this one, IMO.

[Kim Brown]

NEPA is why the Dayhike Mike Plan won't work; without NEPA, maybe the FS would have just re-rerouted 40 feet back. But there's no way to know that, and it ain't gonna happen anyway. It was Pilchuck Audubon Society that delayed the Mountain Loop Highway for 2 years; I don't think they had an issue with the Suiattle Rd. As far as I know, the FS wishes to go forward with the Suiattle Rd project and from what I understand, further NEPA study is the only current delay. After NEPA is completed, it’s back on the FS plate for further consideration. Then the delay would transfer to internal again. I doubt NEPA was the only issue from the beginning. I do know that the fisheries people put the stops to the initial design of the repair at either Downey Cr or Sulphur Creek (I can’t remember which) for up to a year. That is their right to do so, and the public input and protest is part of NEPA – so when I say NEPA is delaying, it encompasses a huge process, including notices and legal b.s., not just environmental studies. As a matter of course, there would be internal delays for any project of his magnitude. It would be ridiculous to dream otherwise. Even getting a copy machine installed in a law firm is a certain struggle. The Forest Service is no different, and it is not a fault – it’s simply the process of doing business. Check out the NEPA requirements and tell me that NEPA shouldn’t cause a delay in a large project.

[HitTheTrail]

I'm jealous. My meagerly trips pale in comparison to THIS one. Nice pics.

[Tom]

[DIYSteve]

As I said above, I have been around NEPA for 23 years. Of course it results in delays, just as any permitting requirement results in delays. I've been up and down that road lots of times. Based on the hundreds of projects I've seen in my career, I would think that one could perform the surveying and engineering work sufficient to support an EA in a few months. I also know from two decades of personal experience that it's a knee jerk reaction for most developers to demonize NEPA and the permitting process in general, but that they nonetheless get their projects done as evinced by the glut of projects over the past two decades. Based on my experience in the industry, if there was a will and funding to get this project done, and there wasn't stiff public opposition, it would get approved within a year from the commencement of engineering. I don't know what has caused the delays, which frustrate me, but there must more to the story. The Seattle Audubon Society objected to the complete restoration of FS 26 to its former terminus. No doubt about that.

[Kim Brown]

We're talking about 2 different audubon societies, then. A public comment not resulting in a delay does not mean they delayed the project (they didn't). Funding and public opposition are key. Did you see where I mentioned fisheries delayed it for about 2 years? By the time it came to an agreement, new damage was done in 2006. Based on what I've seen in NEPA projects of this magnitude, a decade is a pretty good timeline. Don't forget the Wild & Scenic River status (a portion of the Suiattle River is a part of the Skagit Wild & Scenic River). Don't forget the Mission Statement of the Forest Service. Don't forget the typical government red tape. There are lots of considerations for a project of this scale. Rather than bending the ear of your co-worker who isn't on this project, might I suggest calling the Darrington Ranger District, who is? That's how I found out that the last 2 miles of the road is at issue (there is new damage [this year] near Downey as well). They're the ones doing the work. For the record, I'm not demonizing NEPA. I don't mind the delays it creates.

[Tom]

When I called to report the vehicle up there nobody answered the phone or returned my call. Hopefully they had time to investigate it but maybe they were too busy working on that new EA.

[Kim Brown]

Naw, the EA is contracted out. They didn't call back because they're all a bunch of inaccurate and lazy bastards once they loose most of their employees after Labor Day.